Agreed; which is why I don't pay much attention to solar power purchase contracts in the US as a sign of how cheap solar is getting overall. However, outside the US:

-there are no US subsidies involved
-there is not as much pressure to use renewables or to play accounting tricks
-there is more financial pressure to perform, since most other economies aren't as strong as ours

Actually, in at least this case there was a U.S. subsidy. Billions of dollars of it.

The sum of all RE subsidies combined through the history of humanity is less than a single year of fossil fuel subsidies.

Far more important than the money though, is that continued use of fossil fuels means ensured extinction.

Yes, that's true. Well, I'm not sure about their figures though. Some people count any tax break or any favorable treatment as a subsidy. There's all sorts of creative accounting going on. A quick google check shows an alternate claim of about $1 trillion per year in subsidies. And that's from an anti-fossil fuel oriented organization.

Given that the annual world oil and gas revenues are around $1.3 trillion, the claim of a $5.3 trillion subsidy seems rather ... creative.

Anyway, like I said, I'm all for getting rid of all subsidies - and I also recognize that it isn't going to happen or even come close to happening in my lifetime. My point is that you have to look carefully at the "accounting" before coming to conclusions.

Given that the annual world oil and gas revenues are around $1.3 trillion, the claim of a $5.3 trillion subsidy seems rather ... creative.

Anyway, like I said, I'm all for getting rid of all subsidies - and I also recognize that it isn't going to happen or even come close to happening in my lifetime. My point is that you have to look carefully at the "accounting" before coming to conclusions.

I agree there seems to be some issues with the dollar amounts mentioned in that article.

IMF reports that post-tax global energy subsidies rose $3 billion each year from 2011 to 2014, and are projected to reach $5.3 trillion this year, or roughly 6.5 percent of global gross domestic product. That’s significantly more than emerging and low-income countries spend on public health and other core social and economic priorities, according to IMF.

Let's see, $3b each year from 2011 to 2014 would be like $9b. Something's not adding up. But it's an astronomical amount of money either way.

What I can't figure out is why they don't use EVs for mail delivery vehicles around here. Constantly stopping, starting, spending a large percentage of time idling. The pieces of crap they run look hideously inefficient. The total mileage of their route is well within the ability of even a lame battery pack.

Actually, in at least this case there was a U.S. subsidy. Billions of dollars of it.

Hmm. I thought that all the US dollars paid to Abengoa (in the form of purchases and loan guarantees) were for projects within the US, including solar power stations and ethanol fuel processing facilities. Did those subsidies fund projects outside the US? I didn't see any indication of that, but maybe I am missing something.

I can understand all but i feel hybrid is a more feasible solution. As city infrastructures aren't enough for a major e-vehicle. Grid needs to be totally changed and we are talking about 100 billions of investment .

I can understand all but i feel hybrid is a more feasible solution. As city infrastructures aren't enough for a major e-vehicle. Grid needs to be totally changed and we are talking about 100 billions of investment .

The grid as it exists right now could actually handle a tremendous amount of EV charging, because as power prices stand right now, night charging is the most economical - and there's a lot of extra capacity available at night. For example, in California, the grid can supply 46GW, because it needs to on hot summer days. At night that load drops to about half that. So that's 23 gigawatts of excess power available at night that is already designed in and running. That 7 million vehicles charging at 3.3kW (i.e. a Leaf or PHEV) or about half of the total number of vehicles in California.

As solar gets built out there will come a time when power during the peak solar generation periods of 10am-2pm will become cheaper, and at that point more charging will happen during the day (driven by economics.)

I imagine delivery bays dont begrudge use of a powerpoint for a bit of range extending fast charge during the delivery procedure.

Given china embraces nuclear, this must have a big effect on urban pollution especially.

My original post was re electric taking over the most relevant part of the duty cycle - accelleration from stop - this illustrates using electric for the most relevant part of the distribution network.

FEDEX is making an interesting start in USA, with a fleet of hybrid ~4 Ton delivery vans, but the ~800cc motor is more an emergency charger that direct propulsion.

Its worth noting that plug in ev's load on the grid, is biased toward off peak load.

As you tree huggers stuble through life thinking EVs are the current answer presently, the rest of us fuel up and drive where ever we want to, without worry. You all think you're saving the planet, fine I say, it just saves more fossil fuel for the rest of us. It doesn't mount to a hill of beans. All this dumb stuff you guys like, ethanol, wind mills, solar, its all smoke and mirrors so you dummies vote for the greenies. Nothing of economics, and the capitalist culture, that has made it comfortable for you guys to live longer than anytime in the history of mankind, nevers seems to enter into your lexicon. Stop with, the well, but the planet crap. You will never change, in the immortal words of Forest Gump; stupid is as stupid does. I love how art imitates life.

Says the guy who rides an bike. The light of your kind on this planet is fading, fast. Like a T-Rex as the largest comet ever to hit earth quickly approaches.

Actually, in at least this case there was a U.S. subsidy. Billions of dollars of it.

Hmm. I thought that all the US dollars paid to Abengoa (in the form of purchases and loan guarantees) were for projects within the US, including solar power stations and ethanol fuel processing facilities. Did those subsidies fund projects outside the US? I didn't see any indication of that, but maybe I am missing something.

Yep. You are right. I should have dug in deeper when I read the article. Too easy to forget that so many companies are actually multi-national even though they start as being based primarily in one country.

so you dummies
Forest Gump; stupid is as stupid does
but as usual your another dummy
knucklehead this, knucklehead that
The crap all you knuckleheads talk about
becoming rather a bore, wouldn't you say, darling
Dean Wormer, "son, fat drunk and stupid is noway to go through life"
get your panties inna wade
Run Forest Run

so you dummies
Forest Gump; stupid is as stupid does
but as usual your another dummy
knucklehead this, knucklehead that
The crap all you knuckleheads talk about
becoming rather a bore, wouldn't you say, darling
Dean Wormer, "son, fat drunk and stupid is noway to go through life"
get your panties inna wade
Run Forest Run

How about you tone it down and just argue the issues.

Funny, why didn't you site stated facts as well. Art, often mimics life, so I was merely pointing that out in "some" of my postings. All the left loons can't stand facts, like WV coal mines are reopening and miners are going back to work for a good wage. The greenies are on the run. All the windmills and solar panels don't mount to nothing. Insanity is doing the same thing, and expecting different results.

Federal overreach is being corraled. The EPA is being put in checck and be made to follow their original directive. The US is becoming more oil independent. Telsa has never made a dime profit, excluding govt subsidy. Same with windmills. Yet, the uninformed, who only read greenie publications, make so many wrong statements, the deplorables have had it.

We are taking our country back, and they don't like it. But, there is nothing, and I mean nothing they can do to stop it. Oh, you can continue to go on and on, about blah, blah, blah, but its coming to a halt. All you guys haven't seen anything yet.

President Donald Trump has made clear his intention of “bringing back coal.” He has rolled back environmental regulations and moved to repeal the previous administration's curbs on carbon emissions from power plants. Last week, adhering to a British-Canadian initiative presented at the 2017 United Nations climate change talks in Bonn, about 20 nations and regions (expected to grow to 50 by 2018) pledged to cease using coal as fuel for power generation starting in 2030. The U.S. and Germany refused to sign the accord, though talks regarding Germany’s decision will resume in Berlin.

Despite Trump’s rhetoric, the U.S. coal industry continues to shrink, mostly because of issues surrounding the fuel's environmental ramifications, along with an aging industry infrastructure and a greater focus on renewable energy. Solar and wind are the fastest-growing U.S. sources of electricity.

Further proof of the coal market’s demise is evident in its lackluster financial markets, specifically, trading volumes and open interest on futures and options. These instruments are used as hedges by producers and consumers, and as investment and trading instruments for investors, speculators, indices, exchange-traded products, known as ETPs, and hedge funds. But lack of liquidity hurts market participants, making coal trading a challenging prospect. And the markets are not necessarily signaling that coal is an easy short, particularly when supply may not meet demand in certain regions.
==============================
Solar power is fastest-growing source of new energy
Renewables accounted for two-thirds of new power added to world’s grids last year, says International Energy Agency
The US is still the second fastest-growing market for renewables despite Donald Trump’s pledge to revive coal. Photograph: Mark

Adam Vaughan
The Guardian
Wednesday 4 October 2017

Solar power was the fastest-growing source of new energy worldwide last year, outstripping the growth in all other forms of power generation for the first time and leading experts to hail a “new era”.

Renewable energy accounted for two-thirds of new power added to the world’s grids in 2016, the International Energy Agency said, but the group found solar was the technology that shone brightest.

New solar capacity even overtook the net growth in coal, previously the biggest new source of power generation.
=================================

President Donald Trump has made clear his intention of “bringing back coal.” He has rolled back environmental regulations and moved to repeal the previous administration's curbs on carbon emissions from power plants. Last week, adhering to a British-Canadian initiative presented at the 2017 United Nations climate change talks in Bonn, about 20 nations and regions (expected to grow to 50 by 2018) pledged to cease using coal as fuel for power generation starting in 2030. The U.S. and Germany refused to sign the accord, though talks regarding Germany’s decision will resume in Berlin.

Despite Trump’s rhetoric, the U.S. coal industry continues to shrink, mostly because of issues surrounding the fuel's environmental ramifications, along with an aging industry infrastructure and a greater focus on renewable energy. Solar and wind are the fastest-growing U.S. sources of electricity.

Further proof of the coal market’s demise is evident in its lackluster financial markets, specifically, trading volumes and open interest on futures and options. These instruments are used as hedges by producers and consumers, and as investment and trading instruments for investors, speculators, indices, exchange-traded products, known as ETPs, and hedge funds. But lack of liquidity hurts market participants, making coal trading a challenging prospect. And the markets are not necessarily signaling that coal is an easy short, particularly when supply may not meet demand in certain regions.
==============================
Solar power is fastest-growing source of new energy
Renewables accounted for two-thirds of new power added to world’s grids last year, says International Energy Agency
The US is still the second fastest-growing market for renewables despite Donald Trump’s pledge to revive coal. Photograph: Mark

Adam Vaughan
The Guardian
Wednesday 4 October 2017

Solar power was the fastest-growing source of new energy worldwide last year, outstripping the growth in all other forms of power generation for the first time and leading experts to hail a “new era”.

Renewable energy accounted for two-thirds of new power added to the world’s grids in 2016, the International Energy Agency said, but the group found solar was the technology that shone brightest.

New solar capacity even overtook the net growth in coal, previously the biggest new source of power generation.
=================================

Billy, Billy, Billy, where do I start. Ok, facts I guess. More coal mines are open, because the EPAs wings got clipped, allowing for the mines to open. That will put WV in the good guys camp for a long time to come. Coal production is less only because the other fossil fuel, nat gas, became cheaper, thus producing more power, at a cheaper price. Man I love making you smarter.

See, capitalism will always prevail in a capitalist society, you know, ours. See Billy, the EPA has no, none, nada legal authority under the LAW. So, they have less and less impact, meaning nobody listens to them. As we speak, the greenies hiding in that agency, are being ferreted out. Heck, thats a good thing, right. They had no legal authority anyway under the law.

See, the law is a good thing, so, those white guys, who drafted the constitution made sure that when a dispute arises, those disputes shall be decided by the supreme court. It doesn't matter what the EPA, or any other lunatic fringe federal agency thinks. And, wait for it, when the people, you know, you and me, who believe government serves us, (not the way it has evolved over the last 30 yrs or so), gets out of hand, we elect someone who arguably will solidify that branch of government, for at least a generation. So, all your nonsense talk about half truths really doesn't matter more than a hill of beans.

Things are looking up because it won't be long before human-driven cars are no longer allowed on public roads.

At that point, it won't matter any more what fuel they run on, which means they'll pretty much all be electric for normal city use, because that's most economical and sensible.

Your comments will remain indefinitely on archive.org as an insignificant but decisive testament as to what a colossally stupid set of ideas you bought into. Perhaps one day, academics will dig them up and laugh at you along with today's leadership with puzzlement at how backwards y'all were.

This is to express my gratitude to Justin of Grin Technologies for his extraordinary measures to save this forum for the benefit of all.

It's interesting how often you can clearly pick out the teenager who recently discovered strong political opinions and is incredulous that anyone would disagree with their world view, which they only recently subscribed to. Also, how they honestly believe they are uniquely insightful, that everyone else is patently stupid and that they are the first to discover this way of thinking.

Newsflash: You are simply regurgitating the same, tired, (in this case) right-wing trash and condescending psudeo-intellectual insults that have circulated for a long time. You are not smart, nor informed, nor ground-breaking, just an irritating and obnoxious walking cliché.

"Coal production up 7.8% in past year. Down 31.5% last 10 years. #endingwaroncoal."
— Donald Trump on Tuesday, October 31st, 2017 in a tweet

"Coal production is expected to increase by 8 percent in 2017 and by less than 1 percent in 2018."
- U.S. Energy Information Administration

I got news for you guys. When you tired old men respond to the teenager with your tired old meaningless cranks, HE wins. You have nothing while he was telling the truth, awkwardly right as you were awkwardly wrong.

You SHOULD go learn something before you respond. Such as the reason coal production is up this year was because of 3 coal companies which had previously slowed production (Nothing to do with Obama) emerging from bankruptcy this year and stepping up in the second half. Coupled with the rising price of natural gas which increased demand for the cheap coal there came to be the chance for the miners to go back to work. But it was work they could have been doing anyway had market conditions been different, the EPA had nothing to do with it, Trump did not authorize it.

What's worse than "the teenager who recently discovered strong political opinions and is incredulous that anyone would disagree with their world view, which they only recently subscribed to" is the old man whose rotting strong political opinions are impervious to the real world view and are incredulous that reality would disagree with his deception. Which is why he's kicking your ass; weak though he is, you are weaker collectively than he is alone. Once a job is screwed up, any flinging of insults trying to fix it only makes it worse.

Knowing what my point is would involve knowing, wouldn't it? You certainly display a lack of real knowledge. But you're only interested in hostility, no concern for how wrong you are as you spew your hate.